E-TIPS®

Archive for Volume 2, Number 18

Markman-Style Claim Hearings not About to Invade Canada

On January 9, 2004, the Canadian Federal Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by the Plaintiffs, Realsearch Inc and Dingwall’s Machinery & Supply Ltd, from a motion in the Trial Division pursuant to Rule 107 of the Federal Court Rules by the Defendants, Valon Kone Brunette Ltd and BRD Machinery Ltd. The decision on the motion see E-TIPSâ„¢ (Vol 2, No 2, July 3, 2003) had permitted a separation of the issues of patent construction from a trial on the merits of the alleged infringement. In the United States, the claims of a patent are routinely interpreted before trial in claim interpretation hearings, following the US Supreme Court decision in Markman v Westview Instruments. | MORE

Alberta Court Awards Damages for Defamatory Statements in Internet Libel Case

In Vaquero Energy v Weir, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench awarded the Plaintiffs general and punitive damages of $75,000 for defamatory statements posted by the Defendant on the Internet. | MORE

Renewed Interest in Canada for Anti-Spam Legislation?

On February 3, 2004, Senator Donald Oliver reintroduced his anti-spam legislation, Bill S-2. The Bill was originally introduced on September 17, 2003, but died when Parliament was prorogued in November. As noted in an earlier issue of E-Tipsâ„¢ (Vol 2, No 8, September 25, 2003), the Bill, entitled An Act to prevent unsolicited messages on the Internet, aims to establish and maintain a no-spam list, adopt more severe offences for spam involving pornography, fraud, or where children are targeted; erect a regulatory council (where ISP participation would be compulsory); and require the federal Minister of Industry to consult with provincial and international governments on methods to control and reduce spam. Although anti-spam advocates will view Bill S-2 as a positive sign, private members’ Bills often fail to become law unless they attract Government support. | MORE

California Court Holds That an Internet Bulletin Board is a “Public Forum”

In National Technical Systems v Schoneman, the California Court of Appeal has ruled that a “public forum” encompasses an Internet bulletin board. The Court made the finding in the context of an appeal from a trial decision concerning the posting of allegedly defamatory statements about a corporation and its President on an Internet bulletin board. | MORE

An Overlooked Feature of Search Engines: “Google Hacking”

A recent article by Yuki Noguchi in the Washington Post (“Online Search Engines Help Lift Cover of Secrecy”) serves to remind computer users that Internet search engines are able to find information considered by their creators and users to be confidential. | MORE

Canadian Copyright Board Refuses to Enforce Private Copying Tariff

In May 2003, the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) applied to the Copyright Board of Canada for an order in aid of the enforcement of the Private Copying Tariff and the interim tariff of levies collected by the CPCC for the sale of blank audio recording media in Canada. Specifically, the CPCC asked for an order against certain importers believed not to be in compliance with the Private Copying Tariff. | MORE

UK Information Commissioner Comments on Durant Case

In the most recent issue of E-TIPSâ„¢ (Vol 2, No 17, February 5, 2004), it was reported that the English Court of Appeal had concluded that in order for information to be “personal data”, it must be information that affects a person’s privacy. Subsequently, the UK Information Commissioner released a commentary on the Court’s decision and on the impact of its interpretation of the Data Protection Act, 1998 (DPA). | MORE